Brinkman, Joseph C.

Objectives: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains one of the most common procedures performed on the knee with over 250,000 being performed each year in the United States. Although common, results of ACL reconstructions remain less impressive than would be expected. Getgood et al showed a 40% failure of ACL reconstructions including recurrent ACL tears and continued rotational instability. 1 The group found that by adding a lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) decreased the failure rate to 25%. Sommerfeldt et al identified recurrent ACL instability as a risk factor for meniscal tears after ACL reconstruction. 2 In patients with a medial meniscal tear after ACL reconstruction, the decision to proceed with revision ACL reconstruction is straightforward when the graft is completely torn. However, the best approach for a medial meniscal tear after ACL reconstruction with recurrent rotational instability when the ACL graft is intact or partially torn has not been determined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes of patients with intact or partially torn ACL grafts with continued rotational instability and a medial meniscal tears treated with revision ACL reconstruction, ACL reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and isolated LET. We hypothesized that an isolated LET would have similar clinical outcomes compared to the ACL and ACL+LET groups at 2 years. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of all patients with medial meniscal tears after ACL reconstruction. Patients were included in the study if the ACL graft was intact or partially torn with an exam consistent with residual or recurrent rotational instability. Residual ACL instability was determined by a pivot shift of 2 or more on examination. Patients with a grade 3 Lachman’s and partial ACL tear were treated with ACL reconstruction and not included in the study. Over time, the senior author evolved in the treatment of these patients from ACL reconstruction to ACL reconstruction with LET to isolated LET. Patients were placed into different groups based on which treatment they underwent. Clinical outcomes included recurrent meniscal tears, residual rotational instability and recurrent ACL graft tears. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) included IKDC and Lysholm scores at 6, 12, and 24 months. In athletes, we also calculated the percentage of return to play. Results: A total of 47 patients were included in the study including 19 patients in LET group, 12 patients in the ACL+LET group, and 16 patients in the ACL group. The patient demographics between the 3 groups were similar. Ligamentous laxity was identified in 42% of the LET group, 50% of the ACL+LET group and 44% of the ACL group. Partial ACL tears were identified in 63% of the LET group, 75% in the ACL+LET group and 62% of the isolated ACL group. The 6-month International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scores were significantly higher for the isolated ACL group compared to the ACL+LET group and isolated LET groups. However, at the 12 and 24-month follow-up the LET and ACL+LET groups had significantly higher IKDC and Lysholm scores compared to the isolated ACL group (Figures 1 and 2). There was no difference between the LET group and ACL+LET group’s IKDC or Lysholm scores at time point. The ACL group showed a significantly higher percentage of patients with a post operative positive pivot shift (44%) compared to the ACL+LET group (8.3%) and isolated LET group (10.5%) at the 2-year postoperative visit (p=0.02). No difference was seen between the LET and ACL+LET groups with regards to residual pivot shift (p=0.88). Recurrent meniscal tears were significantly higher in the ACL group (31.3%) compared to the LET (5.3%) and ACL+LET (8.3%) groups (p=.04). There was no difference with regards to postoperative graft tearing with 5.3% of LET group, 0% of ACL+LET and 12.5% of the ACL group having a postoperative graft tear. There was a significantly higher rate of return to play in the LET group (90%) compared to the ACL+LET group (71.4%) and ACL group (75%). Return to play at the same or higher level was also significantly higher in the LET group (80%) compared to the ACL+LET (57.1%) and ACL group (50%). Conclusions: In patients with partially torn or intact ACL grafts with residual rotational instability and medial meniscal tears, the addition of a LET with or without revision ACL reconstruction leads to improved patient outcomes, a lower rate of residual rotational instability and recurrent meniscal tearing compared to an isolated revision ACL reconstruction. The addition of an ACL reconstruction to LET in patients with intact or partially torn ACL grafts and meniscal tearing did not decrease the rate of residual pivot shift or recurrent meniscal tears compared to an isolated LET. Isolated LET in this patient population leads to a higher return to play and play at same or higher level compared to an isolated ACL revision or ACL revision with LET. Isolated LET in this patient population is an acceptable option. [Figure: see text][Figure: see text]

OBJECTIVES: This study seeks to evaluate the variability of Medicaid reimbursement and compare it with Medicare reimbursement using the 20 most commonly billed orthopaedic trauma Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes nationwide. The authors anticipate significant variability between states and hypothesize that Medicaid payment will be significantly less than Medicare payment. METHODS: The top 20 most common orthopaedic trauma surgery procedural codes were identified from a previous analysis performed by Haglin et al. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Fee Schedule was used to determine reimbursement rates from Medicare, and state Medicaid fee schedules were used to determine reimbursement rates for Medicaid. State Medicaid rates were compared with their corresponding Medicare rates to determine a dollar difference. In addition, the dollar difference for each CPT code was divided by its respective physician relative value unit. This was used to acknowledge the possible variability in the complexity of orthopaedic procedures and the related physician effort. The Medicare Wage Index was used to adjust Medicaid rates based on the cost of living for the state as well. Coefficients of variation were calculated to represent overall variability in Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates. RESULTS: The mean reimbursement rates for Medicaid were lower for all 20 procedures compared with Medicare. On average, Medicaid reimbursed 16.0% less than Medicare and 29.6% less when adjusting for cost of living. MCD reimbursed at a higher rate than MCR for all procedures in only 9 states (Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, and South Dakota) while 38 states reimbursed at a lower rate than MCR, on average. The coefficient of variation ranged from 0.24 to 0.34 for the Medicaid unadjusted group and from 0.35 to 0.46 for the Medicare Wage Index–adjusted group. By contrast, the Medicare group was consistent at 0.06 for all 20 procedures. The average dollar difference across the 20 CPT codes for Medicaid reimbursement compared with Medicare reimbursement ranged from −$76.89 to −$225.17, and the dollar difference per relative value unit ranged from −$5.96 to −$15.16. CONCLUSIONS: This study found a high amount of variation between state Medicaid reimbursement rates and average rates that were significantly lower than Medicare reimbursement rates for the top 20 most used orthopaedic trauma CPT codes as identified by Haglin et al. The discrepancy in reimbursement was increased when Medicaid rates were adjusted for state cost of living. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Purpose To assess surgeon reimbursement for common arthroscopic procedures, including arthroscopic meniscal debridement and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, in patients with differing risk profiles within the Medicare population. Methods A publicly available Medicare database was used to identify all cases of arthroscopic meniscal debridement and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair procedures billed to Medicare from 2013 to 2020. The surgeon reimbursement from Medicare was collected and adjusted for inflation. All procedure episodes were split into 2 cohorts; those with a hierarchical condition category (HCC) risk score ≥1.5, and those with patient HCC risk scores <1.5. Reimbursement rates were compared between groups. Results From 2013 to 2020, a total of 624,077 meniscal debridement procedures and 567,794 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs were billed to Medicare Part B. During this time, the mean adjusted surgeon reimbursement for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair decreased by 9.2% from 2013 to 2020. During the same time period, the adjusted mean surgeon reimbursement for arthroscopic both compartment meniscal debridement and single compartment meniscal debridement decreased by 7.9% and 9.9%, respectively. Throughout the study period, the mean HCC risk score increased from 1.19 in 2013 to 1.31 in 2020 ( P < .001). Across all years in the study, the sicker cohort had a significantly greater rate of all comorbidities and a greater mean body mass index ( P < .001 for all variables). The mean reimbursement across this cohort was lower for both rotator cuff repair ( P = .037) and meniscal debridement procedures ( P < .001) compared with the healthier cohort. Conclusions This study demonstrates that from 2013 to 2020, inflation‐adjusted surgeon reimbursement for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and meniscal debridement decreased while patient complexity increased. Further, mean surgeon reimbursement was lower among patients with more complexity in comparison with their healthier counterparts for such procedures. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Purpose To use Google trends to explore differences in public interest among types of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) autografts, specifically quadriceps tendon, patellar tendon, and hamstring tendon autografts, between 2008 and 2019. Methods Data were obtained by querying Google Trends for key terms and phrases for online search data ranging from January 2008 to December 2019. Relative search volumes were created based on searches related to ACL reconstruction with comparative analysis generated for search terms related to quadriceps ACL, patellar tendon ACL, and hamstring ACL autografts. Statistical analysis included linear regression analysis, comparison of quarterly search volume trends over time, and comparison of cumulative annual search volumes for 2008 versus 2019. Results Linear models for respective search terms were statistically significant for the quadriceps ( P < .001) and patellar ( P = .007) tendon autograft groups but not the hamstring group ( P = .129). The quadriceps autograft group demonstrated a 12‐year search volume trend change of 0.56, which was significantly greater than the hamstring (0.07; P < .001) and patellar tendon (0.168; P < .001) groups. There was no significant difference in the trend change between hamstring and patellar tendon groups ( P = .20). Percent change in cumulative relative annual search volumes between 2008 and 2019 was 112% for the quadriceps tendon group, 12.9% for the hamstring group, and 18.6% for the patellar tendon group. Conclusions This study indicates a consistently increasing public interest in quadriceps tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction. The quadriceps autograft group demonstrated a significantly greater 12‐year online search volume, greater linear correlation, and larger percent change between 2008 and 2019 compared with patellar tendon or hamstring autograft groups. Clinical Relevance Awareness of patient perceptions has value in informing shared decision‐making, aligning patient expectations, and guiding areas of future research. Each of these has an impact on patient care. Being aware of patient interest and expectations is particularly important in areas with controversial or emerging research.

Background: There is limited evidence related to the effects of autograft type on functional performance after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to compare biomechanical outcomes during a drop vertical jump (DVJ) between patients with a hamstring tendon (HT) autograft, quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft with bone block, QT autograft without bone block, and bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft at 6 months postoperatively in an adolescent population. The authors’ hypothesized there would be differences in DVJ biomechanics between athletes depending on the type of autograft used. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Patients aged 8 to 18 years who underwent primary ACLR were included for analysis. Kinematic and kinetic data collected during a DVJ using a 3-dimensional computerized marker system were assessed at 6 months after ACLR and compared with the uninjured contralateral limb. Results: A total of 155 participants were included. There were no significant differences in terms of age, sex, or affected leg ( P≥ .1973) between groups. The HT group was significantly associated with a larger knee valgus moment at initial contact compared with the QT group (28 × 10 –2 vs −35 × 10 –2 N·m/kg, respectively; P = .0254) and a significantly larger maximum hip adduction moment compared with the QT with bone block group (30 × 10 –2 vs −4 × 10 –2 N·m/kg, respectively; P = .0426). Both the QT with bone block (–12 × 10 –2 vs −3 × 10 –2 N·m/kg, respectively; P = .0265) and QT (–13 × 10 –2 vs −3 × 10 –2 N·m/kg, respectively; P = .0459) groups demonstrated significantly decreased mean knee extension moments compared with the HT group. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that utilizing an HT autograft resulted in a significantly increased knee valgus moment at initial contact compared with a QT autograft without bone block at 6 months after ACLR in adolescent patients performing a DVJ. A QT autograft was found to be associated with significantly decreased extensor mechanism function compared with an HT autograft. Clinical Relevance: This study adds unique kinematic and kinetic information regarding various ACLR autograft options and highlights the biomechanical deficits that should be taken into consideration in rehabilitation.

Purpose To assess outcomes of arthroscopic posterior capsular release among athletes for loss of terminal extension following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Methods A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed for patients undergoing arthroscopic posterior capsular release for knee extension loss following ACL reconstruction between January 2014 and December 2019. Procedure indications included extension loss greater than 10° at least 3 months after ACL reconstruction that was refractory to physical therapy. Patients were included if they were involved in either high school or college athletics, had complete outcomes of interest, and had at least 2 years of follow‐up. Prospectively collected outcomes included preoperative and postoperative measurement of knee extension, International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lysholm score, return to sport data, and complications. Results Eighteen athletes with minimum 2 years of follow‐up who underwent posterior capsular release following ACL reconstruction performed by a single surgeon were included in the analysis. Patients underwent surgery at an average of 16 weeks after ACL reconstruction. Knee extension improved an average of 13.8° at 2 years’ follow‐up (prerelease mean extension deficit 15.1°, postrelease mean extension deficit 1.3°, P < .005). Improvements in the International Knee Documentation Committee score averaged 21.7 at 6 months and 35.0 at 24 months, both of which were statistically significant ( P < .001). Similarly, differences in Lysholm included a significant improvement of 23.0 and 34.2 at 6 months and 2 years, respectively ( P < .001). In total, 77.8% returned to sport at an average of 9.8 months from their primary ACL surgery and 6.5 months following posterior capsular release surgery. No infections or neurovascular complications were observed. One patient required secondary release to achieve adequate extension. Conclusions For athletes with persistent knee extension loss after ACL reconstruction, knee extension was significantly improved at 2 years following arthroscopic posterior capsular release. Substantial improvements in patient‐reported outcomes also were seen. In addition, subjects demonstrated a high rate of return to sport and return to preinjury performance levels. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Abstract Biceps tenodesis has been proven to be an effective treatment for biceps tendon and superior labral pathology. Many techniques including both open and arthroscopic approaches have been reported. Open techniques afford management of the entire proximal biceps tendon but are limited by wound healing issues, increased bleeding, and increased surgical time. Arthroscopic tenodesis offers benefits in terms of surgical efficiency, cosmesis, and bleeding risk. However, standard arthroscopic tenodesis only addresses intra‐articular biceps pathology. In this report we describe an all‐arthroscopic biceps tenodesis technique at the suprapectoral region of the humerus using knotless suture anchor fixation. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

AbstractThis case involves a healthy male with painful lateral knee pain and snapping after a hyperextension injury. Initially, this was felt to be from a displaced lateral meniscus tear; however, he failed to improve after meniscal debridement. Further workup with an ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging identified an aberrant biceps femoris anatomy. He was taken to the operating room and the aberrant slip was identified. A tenodesis of the aberrant slip to the biceps femoris was completed. This resolved the patient's pain and snapping, and he was able to return to all activities.

Background: Shoulder and elbow function is essential to basic basketball actions. Outside of anterior shoulder instability, injuries in these joints are not well characterized in National Basketball Association (NBA) players. Purpose: To describe the epidemiology and associated risk factors of shoulder and elbow injuries in NBA players and identify factors that influence player performance upon return to play. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: Historical injury data from the 2015-2020 NBA seasons were retrieved from Pro Sports Transactions, a public online database. An injury was defined as a health-related concern resulting in an absence of ≥1 NBA games. Primary measures included pre- and postinjury player efficiency rating (PER) and true shooting percentage (TS%) with interquartile ranges (IQRs), stratified by extremity dominance. Multivariate logistic regression analyses with stepwise regression were performed to identify risk factors associated with return-to-play performance. Results: A total of 192 shoulder and elbow injuries were sustained among 126 NBA athletes, with incidence rates of 1.11 per 1000 game exposures (GEs) and 0.30 per 1000 GEs, respectively. Sprain/strain and general soreness were the most common injury types in both the shoulder and the elbow. In the 2 years after injury, baseline PER was achieved in all groups, except for players with dominant shoulder injuries (baseline PER, 16 [IQR, 14-18] vs 2-year PER, 13 [IQR 11-16]; P = .012). Younger age was associated with quicker return to baseline PER (odds ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.88]). Shoulder and elbow injuries did not negatively influence TS% upon return to play (baseline TS%, 0.55% [IQR, 0.51%-0.58%] vs 1-year TS%, 0.55% [IQR, 0.52%-0.58%]; P = .13). Conclusion: Dominant shoulder injuries negatively influenced PER during the first 2 seasons upon return to play in NBA players. Therefore, expectations that players with this type of injury immediately achieve baseline statistical production should be tempered. Shooting accuracy appears to remain unaffected after shoulder or elbow injury.

Background: The optimal graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) in the high-level cutting and pivoting athlete remains controversial. Studies have shown similar outcomes when directly comparing bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft versus quadriceps soft tissue (QST) autograft in the general population. However, no studies have directly compared these 2 grafts in athletes participating in cutting and pivoting sports. Hypothesis: It was hypothesized that, compared with BPTB autograft, the QST autograft would result in similar patient-reported outcomes and rates of retear, return to sport, and complications. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on athletes participating in cutting and pivoting sports (soccer, American football, lacrosse, and basketball) who underwent primary ACLR with either BPTB autograft or QST autograft chosen by the athlete between January 2015 and January 2019. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation and Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale were used to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Return-to-sport and complication rates were identified. Descriptive statistics were expressed using Mann-Whitney test or Student t test for continuous variables and the chi-square test for categorical variables. Results: A total of 68 athletes (32 QST, 36 BPTB) were included for analysis. The percentage follow-up was 89% (32/36) for the QST autograft group and 86% (36/42) for the BPTB autograft group. The 2-year IKDC score (QST, 90.5 ± 6.6 vs BPTB, 89.7 ± 7.8) and 2-year Lysholm score (QST, 91.3 ± 7.5 vs BPTB, 90.5 ± 8.6) were similar between groups. The percentage of athletes able to return to sport within the follow-up period was also similar (88% vs 83%; P = .63). There were 2 retears requiring revision in the BPTB group (6%) and no retears in the QST group ( P = .18). One contralateral ACL rupture occurred in the QST group (3%) and 4 in the BPTB group (11%) ( P = .21). Conclusion: The QST and BPTB autografts demonstrated similar patient-reported outcomes, return-to-sport rates, and complication rates after primary ACLR at 2-year follow-up. Both autografts appear to be reliable and consistent options for ACLR in the cutting and pivoting athlete.